A study by Professors Stephen Choi and Mitu Gulati reveals key differences in the judicial appointments of Trump and Biden. Trump’s judges, notably James Ho and Andrew Oldham, display high dissent rates and greater productivity, whereas Biden’s early appointees rank lower on influence and productivity. Additionally, Trump favors predominantly white males for judgeships, while Biden focuses on diversity, successfully appointing more women and individuals from varied racial and ethnic backgrounds. The appointment strategies reflect differing priorities, with Trump leaning towards judicial philosophy and Biden towards demographic representation.
Trump-appointed judges, like James Ho and Andrew Oldham, exhibit high dissent and concurrence rates, contrasting with the lower influence of Biden's early appointees.
Biden's focus on diverse judicial appointments contrasts sharply with Trump's predominantly white male appointees, reflecting different priorities in judicial philosophy and representation.
The disparity in the judges’ profiles emphasizes Biden's emphasis on diversity and inclusion, whereas Trump prioritized judicial philosophy over demographic representation in his picks.
Biden’s appointees feature a greater representation of women and racial diversity, showcasing a significant shift in the circuit court's demographic landscape.
Collection
[
|
...
]